3 ms·

This is a very shallow analysis of what truth is. One of the main purposes of the scientific method is to ensure that researchers don't fool themselves about th

This is a very shallow analysis of what truth is. One of the main purposes of the scientific method is to ensure that researchers don't fool themselves about the nature of truth. If just observing something is sufficient to determine truth, why bother with double blind tests? The examples given are also convenient in the sense that they have relatively easy answers. What about something like the existence of quarks? What kind of equipment would I need to see for myself that they exist? What if I want to "see" the Higgs Boson for myself? That's not even getting into non-falsifiable ideas like "last Thursdayism" that can't really be proven to be not true no matter how many observations you make. Edit: Here's another example - Elon Musk. Is he a brilliant engineer? A ruthless businessman? A fool? A Nazi? You can probably make a case for any of these conclusions by picking and choosing things he's said and done. How do you even start to determine the objective truth of his capabilities and intentions?

simion314 2y ago
why so disingenuous??? any Zed propaganda you are pushing? We are talking about propaganda, about paid Ruzzians that create for example fake documents daily, some show that Zelensky bought some sports car today, a mansion yesterday, an apartment last week. Is it very possible to figure out that they are fake, maybe not for each of us, but as a group we could find someone that has experience in the domain and can tell you that the document shown is not how such a document looks in real life and is an obvious fake. or a super recent example, you have a protest or gathering and some people claim there were 400k people present and others say there were only 10k people i that town square, there are videos and photos, sure not every person has the ability to evaluate the number but if we combine as a group we can gfind someone intelligent that can figure out what number is correct (except if the group is filled with less intelligent people then someone needs to take pity on them and explain as to children how you can count and estimate a crowd size) And there is always absolute truth if you want to be scientific, like "I do not know" or 2+2=4 where 2 is s(s(0)) , + is well defined, and 4= s(s(s(s(0)))) , and is also truth that 1>0 for real numbers(where...definition of all those symbols) etc

simion314 2y ago

why so disingenuous??? any Zed propaganda you are pushing? We are talking about propaganda, about paid Ruzzians that create for example fake documents daily, some show that Zelensky bought some sports car today, a mansion yesterday, an apartment last week. Is it very possible to figure out that they are fake, maybe not for each of us, but as a group we could find someone that has experience in the domain and can tell you that the document shown is not how such a document looks in real life and is an obvious fake. or a super recent example, you have a protest or gathering and some people claim there were 400k people present and others say there were only 10k people i that town square, there are videos and photos, sure not every person has the ability to evaluate the number but if we combine as a group we can gfind someone intelligent that can figure out what number is correct (except if the group is filled with less intelligent people then someone needs to take pity on them and explain as to children how you can count and estimate a crowd size) And there is always absolute truth if you want to be scientific, like "I do not know" or 2+2=4 where 2 is s(s(0)) , + is well defined, and 4= s(s(s(s(0)))) , and is also truth that 1>0 for real numbers(where...definition of all those symbols) etc